perf-list-digest Sunday, March 28 1999 Volume 02 : Number 069



=======================================================================
Ford Truck Enthusiasts - Performance
Visit our web site: http://www.ford-trucks.com/
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe, send email to:
majordomo ford-trucks.com
with the words "unsubscribe perf-list-digest" in the body of the
message.
=======================================================================
In this issue:

Re: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width
Re: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width
FTE Perf - RE: JJ Thomas Forgive this use of band width.
FTE Perf - 351C 4V & 302 Boss Parts for sale
FTE Perf - ADMIN: Web site updates
FTE Perf - ADMIN: T-shirts
FTE Perf - Rocker Arms
FTE Perf - '85 EFI
FTE Perf - Oregon Law Changes - JJThomas

=======================================================================

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 13:26:06 -0600
From: Sven Setterdahl
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width

>
> Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width.
>
> Define "totaled" "antique" or "vehicle of special interest" under the law.
>
> The law seems to make sense to me. I purchased a brand new car in the
> state of Oregon and later discovered that it had been totaled prior to
> being sold to me.
>
> I do not see why one would be driving a total vehicle. Personally I would
> not want to own, much less drive, anything that had sustained major damage
> to the frame or the body. i.e. totaled.

Totaled does not necessarily mean a bent frame. It just means that the insurance
company decided that the cost of fixing the car was more than the actual value of
the car. This can be a point of debate on older cars and trucks that in their
condition at the time of the wreck might not be that much, but after a complete
restoration, could be worth ten times as much.

The original post show that the law is specifically aimed at pre-1981 vehicles.
This means people looking for cheap resto project, especially if the vehicle is
not considered a collectable by the law, are SOL when it comes to these vehicles.

>
> I do agree that our (your?) elected officials could be making better use of
> their time.
>
> - -Julian
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 11:34:24 -0800
From: JJ Thomas
Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width

You are correct. I had forgotten about the insurance company angle.

- -Julian

At 13:26 03/27/99 -0600, you wrote (edited for brevity:
>
>Totaled does not necessarily mean a bent frame. It just means that the
>insurance company decided that the cost of fixing the car was more than
>the actual value of the car. This can be a point of debate on older cars
>and trucks that in their condition at the time of the wreck might not be
>that much, but after a complete restoration, could be worth ten times
>as much.
>
>The original post show that the law is specifically aimed at pre-1981
vehicles.
>This means people looking for cheap resto project, especially if the
vehicle is
>not considered a collectable by the law, are SOL when it comes to these
>vehicles.
>

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 12:40:59 -0800
From: "Chris Samuel"
Subject: FTE Perf - RE: JJ Thomas Forgive this use of band width.

- -> Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 00:00:47 -0800
- -> From: JJ Thomas
- -> Subject: Re: FTE Perf - Forgive this use of band width.
- ->
- -> Define "totaled" "antique" or "vehicle of special interest"
- -> under the law.
- ->
- -> The law seems to make sense to me. I purchased a brand new car in the
- -> state of Oregon and later discovered that it had been totaled prior to
- -> being sold to me.
- ->
- -> I do not see why one would be driving a total vehicle.
- -> Personally I would
- -> not want to own, much less drive, anything that had sustained
- -> major damage
- -> to the frame or the body. i.e. totaled.
- ->
- -> I do agree that our (your?) elected officials could be making
- -> better use of
- -> their time.
- ->
- -> - -Julian
- ->

- -> Beginning January 1, 2010, prohibits department from registering any
- -> motor vehicle manufactured before 1981 unless it is antique or vehicle
- -> of special interest or meets certain emission standards.


Basically it goes like this:

antique:
Restrictions on where and when you can drive
Currently I believe it is pre 1950.

vehicle of special interest
Restrictions on where and when you can drive
Vary restrictive as to what is and is not. My Ford Truck is not, nether is
any on the 61-79 list

meets certain emission standards.
So forget doing a restoration of any of the 61-79 trucks or any car that is
not an antique and not post 1981. So that cherry 70 Mach 1 well just crush
it. And why would you operate an Auto Dismantling Emporium if the cars all
disappear?
And Why would you supply weather-stripping if the cars and trucks are all
gone?
Please review your position. Read carefully what your government puts before
you.

Chris


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 16:04:40 -0700
From: "sprocket"
Subject: FTE Perf - 351C 4V & 302 Boss Parts for sale

To anyone interested, I have a pair of 351C 4V quench heads that have been
ported.
I also have a brand new 302 Boss 1bbl weiand tunnel ram manifold.


Anyone interested please e-mail offers or questions to sprocket aros.net

Walter Scott
70 Mustang
69 Mustang 302
73 Mustang 351C
76 Mustang 302
92 Ford Ranger Paxton SC 4.0 V6


== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 18:11:56 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE Perf - ADMIN: Web site updates

1. Pictorial has been updated. Nearly completely caught
up (only 3 days behind rather than 4 weeks).
2. Links updated (in antique truck section)
3. 83-94 HP/torque ratings added to the forum.

Ken Payne
Ford Truck Enthusiasts
http://www.ford-trucks.com

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 18:14:58 -0500
From: Ken Payne
Subject: FTE Perf - ADMIN: T-shirts

Several people have been waiting on t-shirts. We ran out
and had order more. We received them on Thursday and the
printing was bad (one color was offset). Our supplier,
Jim Osborn Reproductions (same supplier as our books and
decals) believes in top-notch quality and took them back,
no questions asked. They're going back to press and should
be shipping by the end next week. We apologize for the
delay and wanted everyone to know that we don't cash checks
or charge cards until the product ships.

Ken Payne
Ford Truck Enthusiasts
http://www.ford-trucks.com
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 15:20:57 -0800
From: George Miller
Subject: FTE Perf - Rocker Arms

After having a lock nut back off from one of my rocker arms, I decided
to go to the allen head lock nuts. What a scary noise that was. I
purchased one of the Crane 3/8" sets.

Stock nuts are tightened up 3/4 - 1 3/4 turns and seat on the bolt
shoulder where they are torqued to 18-22 lbs. I had roller tipped
rockers on it and they also took the stock tightening spec.

These are '68-71 429/460 heads with the cast iron rockers, using Rhodes
lifters. The local speed shop told me to take up all the slack in the
assembly, tighten the nut 3/4 of a turn and lock in the allen screw.
Using this 3/4 turn method, there's almost a full turn of pre-load left
in some of the assemblies. I'd appreciate any comments from those of you
who have used these lockers.

TIA,

George Miller
== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 18:02:24 -0600
From: "ben"
Subject: FTE Perf - '85 EFI

In 1985 F-150's did ford offer EFI on 302's and 351's, or only on the
302's?
What's the aftermarket parts selection like for 80's truck small blocks
with EFI?

== FTE: Uns*bscribe and posting info http://www.ford-trucks.com/faq.html

------------------------------

Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1999 19:48:07 -0800
From: JJ Thomas
Subject: FTE Perf - Oregon Law Changes - JJThomas

My inquiry was more for information gathering than anything else. I really
have no position on this.

For the most part it is unlikely that I would restore an older vehicle. If
I did get the time, it would be a '68 Hemi Charger, or Road Runner Super Bee.

I am a Network Engineer by trade and the amount of information I have to
keep up with tends to limit my spare time. (no sympathy, I enjoy my
career choices) Most of the world gets the latest and greatest computers
and software, I get to figure out how to keep it all working together
without blowing up the network. On the side, I am a Sound Engineer
(live and studio) and a retired Deejay. With all that and my church
duties, it is unlikely that I will ever be able to restore a car or truck.

As a former auto mechanic, I would love to get a car or truck to tinker
with. But in reality I don't have the time.

While I was laid off for the last three months, I spent all my time
studying for my MCSE (Microsoft certification). About two weeks after
passing, I got a very good job offer.

One of the reasons for joining this list was to figure out how to replace a
defective Ranger. Do I go for the Ranger with all the doodads? Economical
but difficult to modify. Or, do I go for the F-350, a basic truck, with
lots of add-on possibilities and a V-8 to boot. And if I do get the F-350
(4x4 btw) I will be doing some performance upgrades. You can take the
mechanic out of the shop but you can't take the shop out of the mechanic.

As far as taking a position on this, I have a few thoughts:

As far as restoration goes, I think if the vehicle can be restored to
factory condition, it should be allowed to be registered. I would probably
sign off for a stringent safety test, though.

IMHO, I do not think a vehicle that has sustain major structural damage
should be allowed to be titled.

Passing emission tests is a difficult topic for me. On one hand, if a
restored vehicle can meet the emission standards that were in place the
year it is was manufactured, I think it should be eligible for titling. On
the other hand, I suffer from asthma. I personally think all pollution
should be removed. It would make my breathing easier. ...I think I'll
just stay neutral.

So far as the Auto Dismantling Emporium's and weather-stripping suppliers
go, I don't base my decisions or opinions on anothers capitalistic
ventures. I know that when semi-conductors became prevalent, the tube
testers disappeared from the local 7-11's. I think they were replaced with
microwaves and ready to eat food.

I have a lot of militant friends. I tend to agree with 80 to 90 percent of
their anti-government rhetoric. Personally, I wish the government would
spend more of my tax dollars on things other than what I do in my home, on
my computer, what I watch on TV, what I do to my car, etc... And don't get
me started on the Star thing!!! I agree that there are a lot of asinine
laws in place as well as being considered. I have even been known to speak
up against a few now and then.

I don't really think this is one that I have an interest in doing something
about. Sorry.

As I said in the beginning, my inquiry was more for information gathering
than anything else.

In abstention, I wish you luck.

....


To access the rest of this feature you must be a logged in Registered User Of Ford Truck Enthusiasts

Registration is free, easy and gives you access to more features.
If you are not registered, click here to register.
If you are already registered, you can login here.

If you are already logged in and are seeing this message, your web browser is blocking session cookies. Change your browser cookie settings to allow session cookies.




Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Jobs

This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.